Posted on 02/12/2019 6:19:07 AM PST by deplorableindc
Former Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz may be able to avoid a 50-state scramble for presidential ballot access by seeking the Libertarian Party’s support.
Members of the large national third party, which took more than 3 percent of the vote in 2016, are intrigued by Schultz and might be willing to give him the party nomination in 2020, meaning he would not have to gather hundreds of thousands of signatures as an independent.
Schultz has branded himself a “centrist independent” as he teases a potential challenge to President Trump. But he has Libertarians swooning over his concern about the national debt and opposition to socialist policies such as single-payer healthcare, free college, and high taxes.
“Mr. Schultz describes himself as fiscally conservative and socially liberal, so I kindly encourage Mr. Schultz to look at our platform, as that title goes hand in hand with what the Libertarian Party stands for,” said Florida Libertarian Party Chairman Marcos Miralles.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...
That would be scary
Mr. Schultz describes himself as fiscally conservative and socially liberal...
~~~
This is a wolf in sheeps clothing. Gauranteed.
They’re trying to split off some of the Trump supporters so that the democrats can nominate a radical lefty
Yup. Perot 2020.
This would be very bad.
Gary Johnson supported a carbon tax...after he won the Libertarian Party nomination. :)
Schultz is a Clinton liberal, in no way a libertarian.
“Mr. Schultz describes himself as fiscally conservative and socially liberal...
If I wasn’t so lazy, I could write a very long post on how it is not possible to be both.
Damn my laziness.
I voted libertarian in two of the last three presidential elections and I WILL BE VOTING FOR TRUMP THIS TIME.
I’ve been wanting to bust the uniparty collusion powerhold for a long time but this is not the way it should be done. Trump has proved himself to be better at being all the things any centrist libertarian could ever claim to be, including lowering taxes, regulation, health insurance mandates, and getting us out of foreign occupation quagmires. He’s not perfect, but he is extremely effective in a town full of two faced passive-agressive back-stabbers
a libertarian candidate is why Cuomo won in NY
Republicans are Libertarians on the inside. Libertarians won’t even give the time of day to Republicans when it is called for.
Gary still has a support base with young people I’ve talked to.
To get the Libertarian nomination don’t you have to — like — uh — BE a Libertarian?
Oh wait, they nominated Gary Johnson didn’t they?
So I guess not.
Billionaire CEO: I’m thinking of running for President as an independent. I mostly align with this one party that has been successful in the past, but they’ve become a bunch of loons.
Random kid on the internet: you should totally join up with this even loonier party that never wins elections and only gets in the news when it spoils elections or does some sort of publicity seeking stunt.
Billionaire CEO: nah, I think I’ll keep doing my own thing.
Ross Perot got Bill Clinton elected both times by siphoning off more Republican votes than Democrat votes.
There are a lot of voters in the squishy middle.
He can call himself anything he likes. He’s still a Marxist at heart.
Libertarians have to believe in actual libertarian things - no welfare, limited government, gun rights, sound money / no Federal Reserve, and THE CONSTITUTION AS WRITTEN
I doubt Schultz believes in any of that.
“I doubt Schultz believes in any of that.”
Actually, some of it he does believe or has said so in the past. I think there is a good chance that he would siphon off lots of young demonratic voters who haven’t been completely brainwashed. He might also get the vote of a LOT of white women which would really hurt the demonrats.
He should, in my opinion, be encouraged.
“...squishy middle ...”
Something a lot of people here on FR deny exists!
I’ve always heard and see no reason top doubt it.
For all intents and purposes voting breaks down along these general lines 40% Rat 40% GOP 20% Independent. The battle is always for that 20%,
Certain political conditions might drive the 20% down to 10%, but that middle is always there and decides elections. Anecdotally that “middle” is “soccer moms” and those who always say “I-want-to-vote-for-the-best-man” or “I-want-to-hear-both-sides”. All that really means is on election day I’ll vote for who caught my attention last!
Perot was a gun grabbing electoral college wrong nut. But correct on NAFTA and the national debt. Major problems that we still have and that Trump ran on.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.